‘It has been 10 years since the US-led invasion of Iraq, which marked a turning point in the West’s so-called war on terror. The pretext of the Iraq war was security and freedom, but the bombastic and openly pronounced objective was no less than remaking the greater Middle East region. For the US, Iraq became a quagmire and a humiliation – a strategic and moral failure that the country has spent the last four years trying to forget. But how much has America’s calculus of war really changed? And as Africa becomes the new frontline in the ‘war on terror’, have the Europeans learnt from America’s mistakes? Empire explores the merits, objectives, costs and morality of these wars with our guests: John Nagl, a retired Lieutenant Colonel who co-authored the US army and Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Field Manual; Jean Marie Guehenno, the director of the Center of International Conflict Resolution at Columbia University, and former United Nations under secretary general for Peacekeeping Operations; Barbara Bodine, a professor at Princeton University and a former US Ambassador to the Republic of Yemen who also served with the Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance in Iraq; and Christopher Hedges, a senior fellow at The Nation Institute, former New York Times Middle East bureau chief, and author of several books, including War is a Force That Gives us Meaning and Empire of Illusion’ .
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton testifies on Benghazi – the attacks and the lessons learned before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in Washington, D.C. on January 23, 2013.
‘The hostage crisis in Algeria appears to be over. Algeria’s special forces stormed the gas plant in the middle of the Sahara desert, to end the four day standoff. Local media say seven hostages and 11 gunmen were killed in the latest operation. Britain’s defense minister says he’s appalled at the loss of life. Al Jazeera‘s Paul Brennan has this report on how this hostage crisis unfolded. (19 Jan 2013)’.
‘The Algerian army raided the remote gas plant where Al Qaeda-backed militants had taken hostages. (20 Jan 2013)’.
The mere phrase “Al Qaeda-backed” nowadays seems sufficient to inspire global interest and generate media attention. On this blog I posted the following in 2011: “As I wrote some time ago in Today’s Zaman: ‘In the absence of a Soviet threat, the Obama administration has now declared al-Qaeda and its, by now more than legendary and . . . defunct, leader bin Laden to be the US’s main military adversary. While making sure not to declare an outright crusade against Islam and Muslims worldwide, President Obama continues Cold War policies that ensure that the “military-industrial complex,” to use President Eisenhower’s famous 1961 phrase, is kept busy, happy and well fed. Quite some time ago, the independent journalist Pepe Escobar declared that “Osama bin Laden may be dead or not. Al-Qaeda remains a catch-all ghost entity.” In other words, his contention is that the name al-Qaeda is used by the US to suggest the presence of a threat that is then employed to justify military intervention. The flipside of that stance is now that terrorists and like-minded individuals opposing US dominance and interventionism equally cite the name al-Qaeda to gain credibility, notoriety and media exposure’”.[1] As a result, the fact that mainstream broadcasters like the BBC and Al Jazeera freely use the phrase in their reporting should not detract from the fact that the brand Al Qaeda is nothing but a fabricated fiction, as convincingly argued for by Adam Curtis’ documentary The Power of Nightmares (2004).[2]
What is happening in Mali, which just happens to be south of Libya where Colonel Gadhafi’s regime was so unceremoniously done away with by an “Assisted Rebellion”[3] recently??? Then Sarko was one of the prime-movers of the alliance backing the “Assisted Rebellion” and for good reason, as he was keen to secure access to Libyan oil and gas. At the moment, President Hollande seems to be at pains to secure his predecessor’s gains in the Maghreb, while equally also attempting to safeguard French access to Mali’s uranium reserves, one could argue.
Whereas the Al Qaeda is equally being used by both sides in the conflict today: ‘Back in the days prior to 9/11, Abu Musaab Abdulwadood used to head an organisation called Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat [‘al-Jamā‘ah as-Salafiyyah lid-Da‘wah wal-Qiṭāl’], which now carries the much more media-friendly name Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb [‘Tanẓīm al-Qā‘idah fī Bilād al-Maghrib al-Islāmī’]’.[4] The outspoken critic of U.S. foreign policy William Engdahl recently spoke to broadcaster RT: “Well, I think the intervention in Mali is another follow-up to the French role in other destabilizations that we’ve seen, especially in Libya last year with the toppling of the Gadhafi regime. In a sense this is French neocolonialism in action. But, interestingly enough, I think behind the French intervention is the very strong hand of the US Pentagon which has been preparing this partitioning of Mali, which it is now looming to be, between northern Mali, where al-Qaeda and other terrorists are supposedly the cause for French military intervention, and southern Mali, which is a more agricultural region. Because in northern Mali recently there have been huge finds of oil discovered, so that leads one to think that it’s very convenient that these armed rebels spill over the border from Libya last year and just at the same time a US-trained military captain creates a coup d’état in the Southern capital of Mali and installs a dictatorial regime against one of Africa’s few democratically elected presidents. So this whole thing bears the imprint of US Africom [US Africa Command] and an attempt to militarize the whole region and its resources. Mali is a strategic lynchpin in that. It borders Algeria which is one of the top goals of these various NATO interventions from France, the US and other sides. Mauritania, the Ivory Coast, Guinea, Burkina Faso. All of this area is just swimming in untapped resources, whether it be gold, manganese, copper”.[5]
Not just uranium, but now there has also been found oil in Mali, as indicated by Engdahl. But there is really so much more at stake with regard to France’s nuclear energy needs, as demonstrated by the writer, activist, and subversive Doctoral researcher at the University of Oxford Adam Elliott-Cooper: “Like its neighbour, Niger, Mali is rich in a number of resources, including uranium. Following the ‘oil shock’ of 1973 in which the oil producing nations sharply increased the price of oil, the French decided an alternative route was needed. This alternative was nuclear energy, and over the 15 years following the shock, France built 56 nuclear reactors, more than any other country in the world. France now has 59 nuclear reactors, generating nearly 80% of its electricity, making it the world’s largest net electricity exporter. In 1999, the French parliament confirmed three objectives in relation to this newly found wealth, the first: security of supply”.[6] Elliot-Cooper has this warning and note of hope: “The echoes of the scramble for Iraq’s resources, and the humanitarian catastrophe which followed are stark. The curbs on civil liberties in the West which the so-called War on Terror forces upon citizens is part of the same struggle that activists in West Africa are fighting against uranium mining corporations. Only by building links of solidarity between our continents can people begin to resist the disastrous intersection of the energy industries and state militarism both at home, and abroad”.[7]
On Monday, 7 January 2013, one can read in Hürriyet Daily News that ‘Turkey aims to increase its trade volume with African countries to $50 billion by 2015, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan told journalists at Istanbul Atatürk Airport before his departure to Gabon. “Turkey has been exerting efforts in the development of Africa,” Erdoğan said. The prime minister will visit Gabon, Niger and Senegal in his first foreign trip abroad in the new year, where he will meet with heads of state, chair meetings between the countries’ officials, participate in business forums and sign several agreements during the six-day African tour. In Gabon, Erdoğan is set to meet with Gabonese President Ali Ben Bongo Ondimba and the country’s prime minister, Raymond Ndong Sima, as well as appear in a joint press conference. Accompanied by a large delegation of Turkish businesspeople, Erdoğan will speak at a Turkish-Gabonese business forum that would seek opportunities for cooperation in trade and investment. Erdoğan will then visit Niger on Jan. 8 on the second stop of his African tour and meet with President Mahamadou Issoufou. On Jan. 10, the last stop of the tour, Erdoğan is set to arrive in Senegal to meet with President Macky Sall and Prime Minister Abdoul Mbaye. Turkey’s exports to Senegal stood at $109 million in the January-October period of 2012, down from $116 million over the same period a year earlier. Turkey has opened embassies in 19 African countries in the last three years to bring the total number of its top diplomatic missions in the continent to 31’.[1]
The Financial Times’ Turkey correspondent Daniel Dombey puts forward that over “the past three years, Turkey has opened 19 embassies on the continent [of Africa]. It now has 26 south of the Sahara and will have opened delegations in Chad, Guinea and Djibouti by the end of January [2013] as Recep Tayyip Erdogan, prime minister, visits Gabon, Niger and Senegal”.[ii] Dombey explains further that these diplomatic efforts are “part of a concerted push by Turkey deep into Africa, as it follows China, Brazil and India in seeking to secure economic and political influence on the continent. As Ankara looks to diversify away from the stuttering European economy, it is searching not only for new markets but also a more prominent role on the world stage”.[3]
And this is part of yet another trend, step aside BRIC here comes MIST: ‘Jim O’Neill, the Goldman Sachs economist who came up with the now-mainstream “BRIC” catch-all for four quite different economies – Brazil, Russia, India and China – has done it again. “MIST” – or Mexico, Indonesia, South Korea and Turkey – is O’Neill’s latest rhetorical agglomeration, pulling four more far-flung countries together and talking-up the next tier of large “emerging economies”. Pundits might have a field day with this, with MIST obviously more vapid and perhaps lacking the solidity of its BRIC antecedent. Still, all four have in common a number of factors: a large population and market, a big economy at about 1% of global GDP each, and all are members of the G20’.[4]
As an up and coming MIST country, Turkey is attempting to crack the African market now. In previous months, Turkey’s commitment to Somalia was apparent as part of its more overt Islamic image; but now, the cold reality of economics seems to be taking a front seat. But, the ever-diplomatic Turkish PM instead appears to use his trip to criticise Europe for its colonial legacy, highlighting Turkey’s difference and suitability as an equal business partner with no harmful colonial heritage. In Niger, for example, attending a Turkish-Niger Business Forum in Niamey, he stated plainly: “That is why we are in Niger today. We do not aim to take this country’s oil, gold and diamonds, but to show how we can build brotherhood, make an effort to advance development and fight for freedom of a colonial logic that has endured here for centuries”.[5] According to Today’s Zaman, ‘Erdoğan said [further that] Ankara will continue supporting Turkish small businesses to increase their investment in Niger and that Turkey will be delighted to see its construction companies take part in Niger’s development projects’.[6] But Turkey is not just an interesting destination for smart investors and relaxing tourists, ‘up to 50 intrepid Arab tourists arrive in Istanbul every day to undergo [a certain] procedure [to do with facial hair]. Moustaches are seen as a sign of virility and seniority in many Middle Eastern countries, and visitors are arriving in Turkey in droves for procedures designed to provide thick and impressive hair on their upper lips. The surgery is performed under local anesthetic, with doctors taking hair follicles from more hirsute areas of the body and implanting them in the face. Costing anywhere up to $7 000, the procedure has seen a spike in popularity in patients from the Middle East. In fact the job has become bread and butter work for Turkish cosmetic surgeon Dr. Selahattin Tulunay, based in the fashionable Nisantasi district, the so-called Beverly Hills of Istanbul, and who performs up to 60 follicular transplants a month’.[7] In fact, about a month ago, the Young Turks did a piece on this very topic.
‘As the first round of voting on Egypt’s new draft constitution came to a close, the Muslim Brotherhood claims a majority vote of approval (16 Dec 2012)’.
‘Egypt’s President Mohammed Morsi has announced the referendum on the new constitution will be held on December the 15th. That’s as the country is gripped by unrelenting protests, with thousands coming out both for and against Morsi. Middle East expert, Doctor Omar Ashour, says Morsi is not doing enough to pacify his opponents (2 Dec 2012)’.
The pan-Arab broadcaster Al Jazeera perpetuates the idea that a global organisation called Al Qaeda does exist and is at war with the West: ‘Al Jazeera has obtained exclusive footage of al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb. Its fighters helped rebels seize the northern half of Mali after a military coup toppled the civilian government in March [2012]. In a video address, the group’s senior commander Abu Musaab Abdulwadood calls for peaceful dialogue in Mali. But then later in the video he says his fighters are preparing for war in the West African country. Al Jazeera‘s Mohammed Vall reports from the SaharaDesert. (28 November 2012)’.
Back in the days prior to 9/11, Abu Musaab Abdulwadood used to head an organisation called Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat [‘al-Jamā‘ah as-Salafiyyah lid-Da‘wah wal-Qiṭāl’], which now carries the much more media-friendly name Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb [‘Tanẓīm al-Qā‘idah fī Bilād al-Maghrib al-Islāmī’].
‘Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi’s push for a new constitutional declaration will prove to be unsustainable, an analyst tells Press TV. On Thursday, Morsi issued a new constitutional declaration to expand his powers. The decree opens the way for retrials of officials involved in the clampdown on popular protests that toppled long-standing dictator Hosni Mubarak in early 2011. It also bars courts from challenging Morsi’s decisions. To further discuss the issue, Press TV’s News Analysis has conducted an interview with Abayomi Azikiwe, editor at the Pan-African News Wire, from Detroit, Wafik Moustafa, UK Chairman of Conservative Arab Network, from London, and Nii Akuetteh, an African Policy analyst, from Washington (24 November 2012)’.
Early last month, the BBC’s Shaimaa Khalil stated that in “the [first] 100 days of his presidency Mohammed Mursi has managed to surprise Egyptians on many occasions. The very fact that he was elected at all was surprising to many. Mr Mursi was propelled to power by the Muslim Brotherhood when their original candidate, business tycoon Khairat al-Shater, was disqualified from the presidential race. This won Mr Mursi titles like “The Accidental President” and “The Spare Wheel”. From the outset there were many doubts about whether he would be able to take charge of a country marred by a collapsing economy and a volatile security situation . . . The country had, for the 18 months before President Mursi was sworn in, been ruled by Egypt’s formidable military. They had a tight grip on power and made sure they continued to do so even after a president was elected. They announced a constitutional declaration just days before the election results. It gave the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (Scaf) legislative and executive powers including the ability to veto any article in the drafting of the country’s constitution. But last August, Mr Mursi took the nation – and the world – by surprise when he cancelled Scaf’s constitutional declaration and transferred full executive and legislative authority from the military council to himself. He also forced the Defence Minister Hussein Tantawi and his second-in-command Sami Enan into retirement. He appointed Gen Abdul Fattah al-Sisi, the former head of military intelligence, and the youngest member of Scaf as defence minister. Mr Mursi then continued his reshuffling of Egypt’s top brass when it was announced that 70 other generals in the Egyptian armed forces were to be retired. This was the president’s first real assertion of power and many argue his biggest achievement to date”.[1]
Another month has now gone by, and now Mursi has performed his most unexpected and shocking manoeuvre, as reported by Reuters: Egypt’s President “has issued a decree that puts his decisions above legal challenge until a new parliament is elected, of being the new Mubarak and hijacking the revolution [on Thursday, 22 November 2012] . . . [this] decision to assume sweeping powers caused fury amongst his opponents and prompted violent clashes in central Cairo and other cities on Friday [, 23 November 2012]. Police fired tear gas near Cairo’s Tahrir Square, heart of the 2011 uprising that toppled Hosni Mubarak, where thousands demanded Mursi quit and accused him of launching a “coup”. There were violent protests in Alexandria, Port Said and Suez. Opponents accused Mursi, who has issued a decree that puts his decisions above legal challenge until a new parliament is elected, of being the new Mubarak and hijacking the revolution”.[2]
The BBC’s Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen opines that the “Muslim Brotherhood, of which President Mursi is a leader, is a cautious organisation. The demonstrations might persuade it to dilute its controversial measures. If that doesn’t happen, then the split in Egypt between political Islamists and the rest will grow deeper and more bitter. President Mursi argues that he has taken exceptional powers to deal with Egypt’s enormous problems. But the scenes on the streets of Cairo, and Egypt’s other major cities, show that the medicine could be making the disease worse. The country has had no political or economic stability since President Mubarak fell in February last year. Creating both should be at the top of the agenda for Mr Mursi. Egypt is close to getting a big loan from the International Monetary Fund – but the accusations that he is turning himself into a new Mubarak will worry Western donors”.[3] Being the objective BBC journalist that he is, Bowen ends his analysis on this even-handed note: “Mr Mursi was praised as a pragmatist by the Americans after he negotiated the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. But Egyptians who didn’t vote for him – almost half the people who turned out in June’s election – believe he has taken the new, sweeping powers to ram through an Islamist agenda”.[4]
Over the past months I have occasionally spoken about the situation in Mali, and now it seems something is happening: ‘Six months after Tuareg and Islamist rebels seized control in northern Mali, the United Nations is still divided on its response to the crisis in the West African state. At a meeting on the sidelines of the UN general assembly, the US and France called for a regional military intervention. Mali’s Prime Minister Cheick Modibo Diarra said the West African troops agreed by regional bloc ECOWAS would assist its own army: “The government of Mali would like to see the immediate presence of this force to support the defence and security forces of Mali in carrying out their noble mission of recovering and maintaining territorial integrity and protecting people and property.” But the plan is unlikely to be adopted just yet, say commentators. Diplomats want a more detailed strategy. In July, the Security Council threw its support behind regional political efforts to solve the crisis. In March, a month-long military coup created a power vacuum that allowed rebels to capture large areas in the north of Mali. That rebellion has since been hijacked by Islamist militants. The military stepped down allowing the formation of an interim government (26 September 2012)’.
Armed groups in control of northern Mali are terrorising people and destroying their culture. Human rights advocates have called for the killings, torture and the destruction of religious sites to stop. So what is the government in Mali doing? Will there be an international military intervention? Guests: Sunny Ugoh, Jean-Marie Fardeau, Renaud Girard (27 Sept 2012).
Hillary Clinton Testifies on Benghazi
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton testifies on Benghazi – the attacks and the lessons learned before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in Washington, D.C. on January 23, 2013.
Category:
Africa, Americana, Current Affairs, Libya, Obama, Political Commentary, Terrorism